AIB AIB restoring my tracker - but at 3.67%!

Got that thanks. You are due to come out of a fixed rate, so they are offering you a tracker , as per your contract.

Did anyone get a letter from AIB out of the blue? In other words, not as a result of a fixed rate ending or not as a result of a complaint?

Are they writing to people saying ...

"As a result of our review of trackers, we see that you should have been offered a tracker at the prevailing rate when your fixed rate expired in May 2010. We are now offering you the option of switching to a tracker rate of eCB + 3.67%"

Are are they just offering the rate without referring to the fact that there is a review and that they should have offered it to you some years ago?



There are two versions of clause 3.2

The early one that doesn't expressly mention returning to tracker

And the later one that does

From what I have read people with the express option c "return to tracker" are getting tracker back?

People who took out mortgage in 2005 and who have the early contact are so far not successful?
Last edited by a moderator:
I should have been clearer. Has anyone with Clause 3.2 (c) "conversion to a tracker rate at the end of the fixed rate period"

They were not offered trackers as they were entitled to. I would like to know if anyone who had that clause complained about not being offered a tracker and if they took their complaint to the FSO.

Michael McGrath raising the issue with AIB at the Oireachtas Finance Committee.

Michael McGrath
Clause 3.2 gave customers a choice of tracker
They are being offered 3.67%
That is an arbitrary rate which is higher than your variable rate
Please explaint he rationale.
Why is it not the 1%

A prevailing tracker for someone who

There is no prevailing rate - they don't exist

Those who had rates will revert to them.

McGrath #
How many are in this group?

We have many different cohorts
of the 2,600 ,50% are AIB , 50% are ptsb
We have examined the marketing materials

The customer had a choice
There is no prevailihng rate
they can argue that they are entitled to the rate

Trackers were withdrawn
WE didn't go a good job on understanding rates
When we withdrew the tracker, we made a mistate by not offering them.

There is a prevailing rate on a large customer base
It's down to interpretation

It's based on the rate.


Wardy may I ask if you are hopeful of a positive outcome!?


I am of course! If you don't have hope......

How can they continue to argue against the facts. They used a specific rate to calculate the figures for my contract.....and it's that rate that I am entitled to!


I totally agree Wardy. I think my hope wanes a little when things go quiet. But I guess that's what the banks want. To wear us down!


Registered User
I've just come across this thread and I'm in the same position as others here (- wasn't offered the tracker option on expiry of a fixed rate in 2010). I would be interested in hearing if anyone has gone to the FSO with this issue or as suggested in an earlier post if there is a group pursuing this particular issue. I'd be keen to be involved.


Registered User
I think it's fair to say the group organiser is Padraic Kissane
Hi everyone

I have just picked up this thread but have been corresponding with the Bank for a number of months and have only been offered the 3.67% Tracker margin as above. I see section 3.2 is mentioned quite a lot above but an equally important clause (if it is in your agreement) is section 3.6.1 which provides:

“3.6.1 The tracker interest rate is made up of two parts:

(1) The European Central Bank’s main refinancing operations minimum bid rate (the “ECB Rate”) which is variable; and

(2) The Tracker Margin as stated in Part 1 of the Particulars of Mortgage Loan, subject to 3.6.3 below.”

[My emphasis]

The above section clearly sets out that the tracker interest rate is comprised of the sum of two components: (i) the ECB Rate, which is variable, and (ii) the Tracker Margin, which is not. It is the ECB Rate that defines the “prevailing rate” as per section 3.2 of Part 4, as this is the only part of the tracker interest rate that may vary.

In a letter to me the Bank said:

“In the context of Clause 3.2 the term “prevailing rates” means the interest rates then current and available at the date that a customer’s fixed rate expires.”

While there may be discretion for the Bank to offer different fixed and variable rates under the terms and conditions, the tracker rate that the Bank is obliged to offer under section 3.2(c) must be the made up of the prevailing ECB Rate and the Tracker Margin as set out in Part 1 of the Particulars of Mortgage Loan.

There is no discretion for the Bank to adjust the Tracker Margin at any time. I wrote to the Bank to inform them of this but they refused to even engage in a meaningful argument and offered me the 3.67% again (which I refused, again).

There is an twist in my case in that I started (in 2007) on a 4 month introductory Fixed rate so this Fixed rate is set out in Part 1 of the Particulars of Mortgage Loan and there is no Tracker Margin set out despite section 3.6.1(2) above. However at the end of the 4 month fixed period the Bank sent me a letter offering me a tracker (as per its obligations under section 3.2) and the Tracker Margin the Bank offered me was 1.1%. Therefore the Tracker Margin can be easily determined and cannot be changed under 3.6.1.

In addition, I believe contra proferentem applies to the Bank's failure to include the Tracker Margin in Part 1 as it was obliged to do (contra proferentem is a legal term that states where there is ambiguity as a result of an error in drafting, the drafter cannot gain from the error).

The Bank have consistently denied I have the right to the 1.1% Tracker Margin and have not even addressed my arguments relation to section 3.6.1 but I am hoping this extension might provide them with time to rectify that. People should check Part 4 of their contracts for section 3.6.1 and then Part 1 to see if the Tracker Margin was set out. If not, was it set out in any later correspondence? If so, I believe there is a strong argument the Bank must offer that Tracker Margin now.



So you can prove Aib had errors in the original contract.

Subsequently they offered you a margin of 1.1%

They are now plucking a figure of 3.67% out of thin air.

Could this be a good case for legal action?

I know everyone is saying wait for central bank review but who says that review will be perfect?

The central bank still has to intervene on the similar rate dreamed up by ptsb.

Philip Lane said in oireachtas the central bank remit is only "as far as the contract" which he seems to believe prevents him from intervening with Aib or ptsb offering a random rate which they justify from the wording in their contracts.

The central bank appears to have the courage of a civil servant facing up to the deep pockets and legal advice of private enterprise.
If you guys have not already brought this issue to the attention of the Central Bank you should do so immediately.

They will be checking and signing off on AIB's treatment of tracker issues.

AIB have acknowledged that they were wrong in not offering people trackers.

It seems clear to me that they cannot set the "prevailing rate" retrospectively. I don't see how the Central Bank could stand over this if they are aware of it.



Registered User
Michael McGrath starts talking at 33.40 and he mentions the 3.67% at 40.44
@jpbyrne Balfour posted a link to the oireachtas above where the committee challenged Mr Byrne on the Bank on the offering of the 3.67% prevailing rate being offered. in the midst of this conversation Mr Byrne stated that people who had a ECB rate previously would get that rate. It is worth listening to it from where Balfour states to fully understand.


Registered User
Hi there I got the same letter yesterday offering me tracker rate of 3.64%. I'm just wondering if any of you have gone to the FSO or what was your next step?